lichess.org

Why is chess a game of skill?

So some people win more or less and then it isn't just luck but what makes winner player vs newbie player?

When I try to play chess, there are so many ideas and plans and I feel like I am just "trying this one " out over"that one", so how can people be good or nah based on different options or candidates? What differentiates us from the other?

It is experience, patterns, chunks. Call it whatever you like.

Noobs have only few of them, experts 1000, masters 10k, GMs 50k, the world champion say 100k chunks.

And right, playing well is more a skill than an encyclopedia.

analysis of moves, predicting the worst outcome and picking own move that has best worst outcome. knowledge on chess. By books and experience. Not really that different from any other skill

Chess is a game of perfect information. Everything is on the board. Nothing is hidden. The person that can interpret that information, figure out what to do and then do it more accurately than his opponent will win. There's a lot that goes under the hood so to speak (calculating moves, noticing tactical patterns, endgame theory, understanding positional motifs), all of which make one a stronger player, and collectively we call that chess skill.

It's interesting to compare this to a game of imperfect knowledge, like poker. There you only know a small handful of information, and poker skill has quite a different list from the one I made above (thinking in terms of probabilities, bluffing, body language, etc). Nonetheless, a skilled player consistently beats a weaker one in both games. It's not luck (or in the case of poker, just luck), so it has to be skill.

@#6 @SmithyQ its not likely you can know much informaation becauseso manypossiblegames. in npoker you know more cuz conting the card

@Naaidkwhtthisislol

A new player won't beat an experienced player - if someone rated ~1000 plays an 1800 player 20 times, their likely score is something like W0 D1 L19.

As an aside on this: recently I played someone at bullet a couple of times who was rated ~1850. Clicking on their profile I noted that in that session they had restricted their games to only play 2300+ opponents - and they had lost every one of the 24 games they had played.

Even in 1+0 craziness ratings are meaningful, stronger players pile up very high scores against low rated players.

Reconnecting